Posting Date: August 05, 2003

An Open Letter to Tog (Croc o' Lyle) -- "My suggestion would be for people to get active in UPA or SIG-CHI or AIGA-ED or aifa or whatever and make an impact in the direction of those organizations. Help them better acheive their stated goals. Start a local chapter, volunteer for a board position, start a SIG, plan an event around ID/IA that's sponsored by an existing organization. It's a hell of a lot less work than creating a whole new organization, and you won't be competing with related organizations either." (Comments: Fix what we've got or fork it?)

Reader Comments...

Being a lefty member of various groups I am used to seeing factions attempt to set up their own organisations in an attempt to resolve long standing issues in the wider community.

These organisations rarely survive in the longer term, but they can be very useful in forcing the elder organisations to think about how they are responding to their existing members and their potential members.

I think that Tog is doing the right thing by attempting to set up the IAA. If there are enough interested people who are willing and able to get it off then ground then there is a need for it.

Even if the IAA fizzles out like a match in a puddle, at least it will have sparked a healthy debate within the "confederation of like minded interfacy type thingy groups".

The uprising of the masses must lead to the overthrow of the domination of one class and to the establishment of the domination of another. Only then have we achieved a revolution.

Posted by: Mac on August 5, 2003 08:40 AM

I think it is good to see the discussion generated by this. Lyle, Girlwonder, me, and the experiencedesign group on Yahoo!, have all jumped in quickly about this.

Thing is, I don't see anyone saying, Go Tog!

As I said in my response, coordination needs to happen at the society level, not the "grassroots" level Tog speaks of. Get those societies working together in an official capacity and you just might have something.

Posted by: fajalar on August 5, 2003 10:04 AM

Nice, Lyle!

Mac - I disagree. The field needs cohesiveness and focus to become more effective and thus respected. I see Tog as either ignoring current problems or intentionally detracting from them (he is at NNG, after all)...

Posted by: Ron Zeno on August 5, 2003 11:47 AM

Ron, I think's its my cynical optimism showing through!

Posted by: Mac on August 6, 2003 03:19 AM

Instead of repeating the negatives of the past where Usability was ignored or not included as part of budget; develop a list of postitives and stories that show that it simply cannot be ignored anymore. We all agree this is the case right?

Posted by: Daniel Szuc on August 6, 2003 11:16 PM

Daniel - Please explain in more detail.

CHris MacGregor has some good comments on Flazoom: http://www.flazoom.com/cooler/1060096272,6051,.shtml

Posted by: Ron Zeno on August 6, 2003 11:56 PM

Hi Ron, just that sometimes when I am pitching usability into organisation, I can find myself slipping into the "I am lucky to be invited to the table" mindset. And I ask myself why? I am working to shift this thinking towards, usability cannot be ignored if a product is to be successful and a more positive approach. Understanding of course that usability is only one of many factors. If "developers", for example, are seen as imperatives in projects, why not usability folks? Does this make sense? Its getting late in Hong Kong :) I guess what I am trying to say is that we should always be invited to the project table.

Posted by: Daniel Szuc on August 7, 2003 06:35 AM

Daniel - No, unless you define who "we" is, and in doing so exclude the incompetent, delusional, and unethical. But if you're just saying that many people are taking the viewpoint of being underdogs and it's detrimental to what they say they are trying to accomplish, then I'd agree with that...

Mark Hurst is as fed up with the name game as I: http://www.goodexperience.com/columns/03/0808.disappear.html

Posted by: Ron Zeno on August 8, 2003 03:58 PM

I like the word "Usability"

Some of the other terms being thrown around recently are just too "fluffy" and I see these as sub-sets of an already established profession i.e they all work in tandem to make something more usable. Or perhaps these are specialist roles? Usability = Doctor (Practitioner), Information Architect = Podiatrist (Specialist) Sometimes I feel like I am trying to revive sick products :)

I am also in favour of supporting existing organisations to strengthen our part in the projects. This should also include some criteria to "formalise" what it means to be a Usability Practictioner and Specialist. By the way just as there is an 'eye for design' is there also an 'eye for usability'?

Posted by: Daniel Szuc on August 8, 2003 07:17 PM

Subscribe to Webword.com
Receive the best free usability newsletter on the Internet.

URL: http://webword.com/weblog/